AMD's Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 23, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
3dsmax 9 - SPECapc 3dsmax CPU Rendering Test
Today's desktop processors are more than fast enough to do professional level 3D rendering at home. To look at performance under 3dsmax we ran the SPECapc 3dsmax 8 benchmark (only the CPU rendering tests) under 3dsmax 9 SP1. The results reported are the rendering composite scores:
Even 3D rendering performance under 3dsmax 9 is quite competitive. Both the 955 and 940 are able to hang with the Q9400 and Q9550. Once again, the i7s hold a generational gap advantage in performance.
Cinebench R10
Created by the Cinema 4D folks we have Cinebench, a popular 3D rendering benchmark that gives us both single and multi-threaded 3D rendering results.
Single or multi-threaded, the 955 is faster than the Q9550 here. But if you're serious about 3D rendering you'll want the Core i7.
POV-Ray 3.73 beta 23 Ray Tracing Performance
POV-Ray is a popular, open-source raytracing application that also doubles as a great tool to measure CPU floating point performance.
I ran the SMP benchmark in beta 23 of POV-Ray 3.73. The numbers reported are the final score in pixels per second.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
65 Comments
View All Comments
dragonsphere - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
I read articles like this all the time for multiple websites. I am a professional application performance tester and I can tell you that most of these articles are junk just to stir up the masses. Most of their statistics are based on averages. This means that 51% of the time they are wrong. Have you noticed that none of them show confidence tests to prove that their data is accurate? Also they don't use 90th percentiles. I think this is due to the lack of the tools that they are using to generate these sub-standard statistics. Until the software they are using is more precise I would consider these tests to be junk science.cal954 - Saturday, May 2, 2009 - link
Thanks for all the information. I used this model to build my first computer, although no matter what I try to do, my CPU-Z never shows me the multiplier being anything but 4.0 and I can't get my core speed above 800 even w/ CnQ disabled.Hamlet2000 - Saturday, May 9, 2009 - link
You need to update your bios on your motherboard. I had the exact same thing with my new Phenom II 955 build on a Gigabyte board. Once you update, go into your bios and set the clock at 200 x 16. You'll notice the speed difference right away - it's a smoking fast CPU!Edgemeal - Monday, April 27, 2009 - link
Geez, some of you people make it sound like AMD has to have the fastest CPU in the market or they just aren't any good or something!AMD knows what their chip/PC parts are worth in the market place and their price/performance fits in very nicely. I applaud AMD, without them you'd be reading about the new $900 2GHz P4s right about now LOL!
swapnadip - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.
On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.
This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.
Thanks
swapnadip - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.
On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.
This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.
Thanks
swapnadip - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.
On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.
This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.
Thanks
iFX - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
----
Why is it every AMD article on this site has errors?
wowo - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
how x264?x264 benchmark 2.0 is very old .it is 819,but new x264 is 1139.intel is better for 1139 a lot.
please test wirh new x264.
ultrageek1111 - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
you know what they say about black processors...